IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Technological Imitation and Innovation in New European Union Markets

Listed author(s):
  • Ainura Uzagalieva
  • Evžen Kocenda
  • Antonio Menezes

We analyze the role of imitation and innovation in promoting technological progress in new members of European Union: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. The two modes of technological development—innovation and imitation—are distinguished from one another by identifying the dominant orientation of innovation efforts at the industry level. Specific industry features and the origin, structure and size of foreign direct investments in these countries are utilized for this purpose. The empirical relationship between intra-industrial bilateral trade flows, which proxy the level of technological progress, and innovation expenditures is analyzed using a gravity model. During the estimation stage, we use appropriate instruments to account for the potential endogeneity of innovation to trade. The results reveal the important role of foreign direct investment and multinationals in the technological progress of the region. Specifically, technological progress that is due to innovation is driven mainly by affiliates of foreign firms and multinationals.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/portal/page/portal/DocBase_Content/WP/WP-CESifo_Working_Papers/wp-cesifo-2010/wp-cesifo-2010-04/cesifo1_wp3039.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by CESifo Group Munich in its series CESifo Working Paper Series with number 3039.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2010
Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_3039
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich

Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo-group.de
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 1996. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," International Trade 9608001, EconWPA, revised 13 Jun 1997.
  2. Lefilleur, Julien & Maurel, Mathilde, 2010. "Inter- and intra-industry linkages as a determinant of FDI in Central and Eastern Europe," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 309-330, September.
  3. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953.
  4. Anne-Celia Disdier & Thierry Mayer, 2003. "How Different is Eastern Europe? Structure and Determinants of Location Choices by French Firms in Eastern and Western Europe," Working Papers 2003-13, CEPII research center.
  5. Alwyn Young, 1991. "Learning by Doing and the Dynamic Effects of International Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 369-405.
  6. Bernard, A., 1997. "Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?," Working papers 97-21, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  7. Kocenda, Evzen, 2001. "Macroeconomic Convergence in Transition Countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-23, March.
  8. Alan V. Deardorff, 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," NBER Working Papers 5377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
  10. Kai Carstensen & Farid Toubal, 2003. "Foreign Direct Investment in Central and Eastern European Countries: A Dynamic Panel Analysis," Kiel Working Papers 1143, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
  11. Luis A. Rivera-Batiz & Paul M. Romer, 1991. "Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 531-555.
  12. Poyago-Theotoky, Joanna, 1998. "R&D Competition in a Mixed Duopoly under Uncertainty and Easy Imitation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 415-428, September.
  13. Moudatsou, Argiro, 2003. "Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth in the European Union," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 18, pages 689-707.
  14. Barro, Robert J. & Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1995. "Technological Diffusion, Convergence and Growth," CEPR Discussion Papers 1255, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  15. Thomas Hatzichronoglou, 1997. "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/2, OECD Publishing.
  16. Kocenda, Evzen & Kutan, Ali M. & Yigit, Taner M., 2008. "Fiscal convergence in the European Union," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 319-330, December.
  17. repec:bil:bilpap:0501 is not listed on IDEAS
  18. Grossman, G.M. & Helpman, E., 1988. "Comparative Advantage And Long-Run Growth," Papers 39-88, Tel Aviv.
  19. Devinney, Timothy M., 1993. "How well do patents measure new product activity?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 447-450.
  20. Kocenda, Evzen & Valachy, Juraj, 2006. "Exchange rate volatility and regime change: A Visegrad comparison," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 727-753, December.
  21. Landesmann, M.A. & Stehrer, R., 2006. "Goodwin's structural economic dynamics: Modelling Schumpeterian and Keynesian insights," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 501-524, December.
  22. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
  23. Fagerberg, Jan & Srholec, Martin & Knell, Mark, 2007. "The Competitiveness of Nations: Why Some Countries Prosper While Others Fall Behind," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1595-1620, October.
  24. David Currie & Paul Levine & Joeseph Pearlman & Michael Chui, 1996. "Phases of Imitation and Innovation in a North-South Endogenous Growth Model," School of Economics Discussion Papers 9602, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
  25. Laura Bottazzi & Giovanni Peri, "undated". "Innovation and Spillovers in Regions: Evidence from European Patent Data," Working Papers 215, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
  26. GÈrard Roland, 2001. "Ten Years After . . . Transition and Economics," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 48(4), pages 3-3.
  27. Sofronis Clerides & Saul Lach & James Tybout, 1996. "Is "Learning-by-Exporting" Important? Micro-Dynamic Evidence from Colombia, Mexico and Morocco," NBER Working Papers 5715, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Moraga-Gonzalez, Jose Luis & Viaene, Jean-Marie, 2005. "Trade policy and quality leadership in transition economies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 359-385, February.
  29. Demekas, Dimitri G. & Horvath, Balazs & Ribakova, Elina & Wu, Yi, 2007. "Foreign direct investment in European transition economies--The role of policies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 369-386, June.
  30. Freund, Caroline L. & Weinhold, Diana, 2004. "The effect of the Internet on international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 171-189, January.
  31. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2006. "Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Imitation," Economics Working Papers 0025, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
  32. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1991. "Innovation, Imitation, and Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 807-827, August.
  33. Valdemar Smith & Erik Strøjer Madsen & Mogens Dilling-Hansen, 2002. "Do R&D Investments Affect Export Performance?," CIE Discussion Papers 2002-09, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
  34. Ernst, Holger, 2001. "Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 143-157, January.
  35. Krugman, Paul, 1979. "A Model of Innovation, Technology Transfer, and the World Distribution of Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(2), pages 253-266, April.
  36. Estrin, Saul & Hanousek, Jan & Kocenda, Evzen & Svejnar, Jan, 2009. "Effects of privatization and ownership in transition economies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4811, The World Bank.
  37. Kocenda, Evzen & Kutan, Ali M. & Yigit, Taner M., 2006. "Pilgrims to the Eurozone: How far, how fast?," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 311-327, December.
  38. Gassebner, Martin & Keck, Alexander & Teh, Robert, 2006. "The impact of disasters on international trade," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2006-04, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
  39. Stefan Lachenmaier & Ludger Woessmann, 2004. "Does Innovation Cause Exports? Evidence from Exogenous Innovation Impulses and Obstacles," CESifo Working Paper Series 1178, CESifo Group Munich.
  40. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
  41. Bleaney, Michael & Wakelin, Katherine, 2002. " Efficiency, Innovation and Exports," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 64(1), pages 3-15, February.
  42. Alwyn Young, 1991. "Learning by Doing and the Dynamic Effects of International Trade," NBER Working Papers 3577, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  43. Babetskaia-Kukharchuk, Oxana & Maurel, Mathilde, 2004. "Russia's accession to the WTO: the potential for trade increase," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 680-699, December.
  44. Helpman, Elhanan, 1981. "International trade in the presence of product differentiation, economies of scale and monopolistic competition : A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 305-340, August.
  45. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_3039. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Klaus Wohlrabe)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.